Subject: RE: Death of the Internet - details at 11

From: "Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar \(UMKC-Student\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 04:34:09 -0600

> That's why I think it makes more sense to backport the SCTP multihoming
> features to TCP so all TCP apps can use them without having to be
> changed, or even better: contain the changes in a separate shim layer
> so that all transport protocols can become address agile without having
> to be changed.
>
> As far as I can tell, most of the multi6 wg participants are thinking
> along similar lines.
 
 1. multi6 has not done with architectural analysis. It is still unknown
    whether a multi-addressing or a id/loc split proposal(which includes
    shim layer) or something else is going to be accepted. 
 
 2. If you look at the ML archive, all possible proposals are discussed 
    (which includes SCTP, SLAP or whatever..) So, your statement about 
    *most* WG participants thinking along similar lines is wrong.
 
 3. you should speak for yourself, not for others.

---

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:02:00 +0100

>  3. you should speak for yourself, not for others.

I think I used enough qualifiers to be able to make this statement. 
Obviously reality is more complex, so anyone interested should check 
out the drafts submitted to multi6 and/or the mailing list archive.

---

From: jfcm <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:10:50 +0100

At 12:02 30/01/04, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>Obviously reality is more complex, so anyone interested should check out 
>the drafts submitted to multi6 and/or the mailing list archive.

Anyone concerned would like to be kept informed by an executive summary of 
this archive.